Lol @ pats and eagles swapping 193/194 for nothing. I half-wonder if they did it in order to see if the league would approve it.
04-30-2011 04:12 PM
#76
| |
Lol @ pats and eagles swapping 193/194 for nothing. I half-wonder if they did it in order to see if the league would approve it. | |
04-30-2011 04:15 PM
#77
| |
or maybe they really just did do it to fuck with everyone and/or keep their trading streak alive. who knows. It's yet another thing I could see myself doing, then laughing at how everyone got so damn confused about it | |
04-30-2011 04:22 PM
#78
| |
Pure strategy imo | |
| |
04-30-2011 05:43 PM
#79
| |
find myself torn on the Texans draft | |
04-30-2011 06:13 PM
#80
| |
wow, long ass response got eaten by internet goblins. | |
04-30-2011 06:14 PM
#81
| |
04-30-2011 07:05 PM
#82
| |
I agree with 1.. job security is definitely a big part of it. 2... maybe some people look at it that way; I certainly don't. Draft currency in the modern NFL is such current picks are ~= to a future pick, plus 1 round. So a current 2 equals next year's 1, current 3 equals next year's 2, etc. Of course that's not exact but it's approximate. That type of logic is severely flawed and invariably it leads to your team simply having less talent over time. I mean, the idea of a team trading their current 2 AND future 1st (which could be anywhere.. injuries.. letdown season, etc) for a LATE 1st in the current year is just stupid stupid stupid. | |
04-30-2011 11:41 PM
#83
| |
Uhh... we got rid of Roy Williams for a reason, we picked up Burleson for a reason. Not saying that Burleson > Williams, but I wasn't saying GOOD LUCK COVERING BURLESON LOLOL. I was putting up a list of ALL of Detroit's offensive weapons, which at this point is lolomfgjoygasm to any Lions fan out there. Any QB in the league would be ecstatic to play with a roster that jacked with playmakers. | |
| |
04-30-2011 11:47 PM
#84
| |
You seriously think there will be a BETTER RB prospect next year in the 1st round than Mark Ingram? Especially considering the Saints will probably be drafting later than 15-20+? | |
| |
05-01-2011 05:32 AM
#85
| |
When you are in the high end of a success cycle, your core group of players is going to lose a lot of value as a group in the span of just a single season. The NFL is rough and personnel turnover is amazing. Take any good team and their core 20-25 best players and a pretty good chunk of that group is going to be battered into ineffectiveness/retirement by next year. At the same time, young players who are not yet physically destroyed can improve significantly under good coaching/training with a year's experience as well as two seasons of minicamps/training camps/preseasons...you will in fact generally see last year's second-rounders outperform this year's first-rounders. | |
| |
05-01-2011 03:30 PM
#86
| |
No there won't be, but next year's class is def. better. Here's a good thread from another forum | |
05-01-2011 03:33 PM
#87
| |
So what was the overall grade for the Pats draft? | |
| |
05-01-2011 03:52 PM
#88
| |
I didn't mean that to come off as dickish as it looks. I honestly don't follow college football that religiously, all I know is that Ingram is a beast and I'd like to think he will be a solid NFL running back for at least 3-5 years, give or take a year. | |
| |
05-01-2011 03:54 PM
#89
| |
| |
05-01-2011 10:23 PM
#90
| |
Most of the experts are slobbering all over the Texans' draft. | |
| |
05-02-2011 01:38 AM
#91
| |
| |
05-02-2011 05:27 AM
#92
| |
| |
05-02-2011 12:45 PM
#93
| |
| |